[01:01:21] @salmonskinroll [01:01:26] You can review this PR: https://github.com/navcoin/navcoin-core/pull/554 [01:01:53] Basically no functionality changes, just a syntax change from using Q_Foreach to using c++11 for loops [01:02:21] So the wallet should function exactly like what it does before the changes [01:03:44] okay, what should i do exactly? just build it and play around with it to make sure things are normal as usual? [01:05:37] @mxaddict [01:08:51] Yes, that's exactly what we need to do in a PR like this [01:09:03] Basically just make sure that the change does not break anything [01:11:01] (does not break anything that was not already broken) 😄 [01:11:22] okay, will do that one after done with 605, so basically all PRs need to be tested to see if they work normally? some changes are not obvious users so cannot be tested directly [01:11:22] Ofcourse if there is something wrong that is not related to the PR itself, we can still approve it. [01:11:40] @salmonskinroll yes [01:11:49] And your username has made me hungry yet again ;D [01:11:58] lol [01:12:04] it makes me hungry all the time [01:12:13] sounds good, i'll test the PRs one by one then [12:26:16] Hey, trying to upgrade but hitting an error. Any ideas? ``` CXXLD navcoind /usr/bin/ld: libnavcoin_consensus.a(libnavcoin_consensus_a-blake.o): relocation R_X86_64_32 against.rodata' can not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC libnavcoin_consensus.a: error adding symbols: Bad value collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status Makefile:3845: recipe for target 'navcoind' failed make[2]: *** [navcoind] Error [12:26:16] 1 make[2]: Leaving directory '/wallets/src/navcoin/src' Makefile:9726: recipe for target 'all-recursive' failed ``` [12:26:49] this is from a exchange. have u seen it before? @mxaddict [12:52:57] Hmmm [12:53:13] Do we know what os and gcc version? [13:03:20] @aguycalled [13:07:11] I guess what would help is os version, gcc version [13:07:20] And what ./configure they called [13:07:25] So we can try and replicate [14:10:02] just asked [16:30:27] @mxaddict #554 doesn't have static rewards? [16:30:27] https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/416000318149754881/626787672022581288/unknown.png [16:41:35] you need to generate more blocks to activate the soft fork [16:43:54] I think 900 blocks are needed to activate the soft fork [19:02:15] @prole when you have a moment, can you look at this PR: https://github.com/navcoin/navcoin-core/pull/561 [19:46:31] Is it possible that a receiving node can get a confirmation before the sender complete the transaction? Say I want to send 100 NAV to Alex, he'll see on his wallet that me wanting to send him 100 NAV, he hits okay and then transactions completes. [19:46:53] This will reduce the anxiety of sending coins tremendously. [20:12:20] Sending usually takes 20-30 seconds and you get a confirmation already, I'm not sure what you mean. [20:16:20] He mean something like a confirmation message for the receiver. But thats not really needed. You can't type a address accidentally wrong, because in the address is a small hash that the address doesn't contain mis typings. [20:16:54] And in future with NavNS you can send nav to a name [20:17:21] I would never see a need to type an address though, just saying. It's either i copy paste it, or scan a qr code. [20:19:15] I sometimes did it^^ But there is also a chance for missing some letters by copy &paste. But sending would not work then. [20:19:52] Yes, when there are missing chars, it won't pass address validation. [20:31:12] True. But from newcomers it's a lot of stress. [20:31:39] They don't know that missing a character doesn't matter cuz the wallet will just display a warning [20:31:55] At least I was pretty worried when I first got into crypto. [20:42:24] Tru that @salmonskinroll [20:43:18] Maybe validation can be done real time [20:43:46] So it shows that the address is valid even before you click send [20:46:32] That could work, just a check mark on the right of the input line should do it. Will be always showing "x" until you type in the last character. [20:54:37] @salmonskinroll why does your github user and discord user not match? Took me a while realize i was reading github comments from you. Lol. [20:55:36] lol i have a bad habit of creating new usernames everywhere. they are never the same. sometimes i forget what i am called on different platforms 😛 [20:56:13] @salmonskinroll i wanted to send you some navs from the dev bounty for helping testing if you could share a nav address 😉 [20:56:28] You've master the art of anonymity i guess. Haha. [20:57:30] Lol privacy for the win! Sure @aguycalled. Thanks. [20:57:33] NL9jPW75P4kNMdvQmFBpYVkZ3sABQtXfYY [20:58:01] @salmonskinroll add your address on github via a comment so people can see that testing can also be rewarded ❤ [20:58:33] good point. i will do it in the future 🙂 [20:58:50] relayed the comment in the conversation thread [20:59:15] @aguycalled @prole I'm try to spend some time on getting some of the smaller PRs reviewed [20:59:22] Still catching up [20:59:35] how was the meeting with the dev? [20:59:41] did he run away? [20:59:45] lol [20:59:50] He was genuinely interested [21:00:01] But alas said he does not have time right now. [21:00:09] Future prospect atleast [21:00:36] I guess it was not destined, his name did not start with a D [21:01:13] We have the ABC and need a dev with D as first letter, lol. [21:01:38] lol good one, didn't realize that [21:03:31] I can't take credit, it was @prole who coined the idea. [21:08:16] @aguycalled [21:08:36] The new dao PR has the gui to accept /reject forks right? [21:08:42] yep [21:08:58] That's a pretty neat feature [21:09:11] Gonna get some time on that review today [21:09:23] So much that needs looking at [21:09:50] I've only read half the changes, and about half the docs on the PR [21:09:55] i planned to write the missing tests on the weekend [21:10:26] but it'd be good if others who are not me also have a look at ways to attack the design [22:31:43] Alex B = @mxaddict ? Craig Lol yes now we need someone with D 😂 Q can become hard